(February 15, 2015 at 4:53 pm)emilynghiem Wrote: Hi Natachan
I am saying that Jesus represents or embodies the spirit of Justice.
Maybe this is a different angle for teaching the meaning of Jesus for secular gentiles under natural laws. But it's the same Jesus.
When I teach math, some students just want to work the symbols and get the right answer. Other teachers and students are all into this weird way of using visuals to count the values and show what is being moved around. I don't need that and can't stand that way. But the math works the same, whether you focus on the symbols or you tangibly see touch and move the physical quantities around.
I notice many people complain they don't recognize the other way of doing math which looks foreign to them, and their brains just don't process that way.
I am guessing the same is happening when I go around explaining that Jesus represents Justice on a collective abstract level and doesn't have to be symbolized in personified form with all the religious ritual attached. I didn't understand that way of teaching it, so I explain in secular natural terms that make sense to me. And I relate to other secular minds more like mine who can grasp the same concepts and process that way.
the other way always seems a bit mystifying to me, but I understand that's how other people relate and get it. I prefer the secular explanation that i find more practical to real life application and change in the real world I can see, feel and appreciate.
Thanks! I don't think it is fair at all to only teach Jesus one way, and judge people for not getting it that way if our minds don't process like that.
I'd rather form a consensus that Jesus can be taught this other way for secular gentiles, and then reconcile the two ways of teaching it where we all agree it's the same concept and process.
I'm afraid I don't understand this. Was Jesus a person? Or is he a fictional construct used to personify some abstract concept?
